Steam Box prototype shown off by Valve at CES

Share This article

Do not adjust your LCD monitor: What you are looking at might just be the mythical Steam Box. Codenamed Piston, and developed by Xi3 in partnership with Valve, this grapefruit-sized computer was built to “specifically support” both Steam and its new Big Picture mode.

While Piston is on display at at CES 2013, we’re severely lacking in actual details. Valve and Xi3 are calling it a “development stage computer game system” that is specifically designed for Steam and Big Picture mode, “for residential and LAN party computer gaming on larger high-def screens.” The press release states that Valve has invested in Xi3, but we don’t know how much, and it doesn’t explicitly state that Valve invested specifically in Piston. In short, this is probably the Steam Box development kit, or prototype, or something along those lines.

If we take a look at Xi3’s site we can perhaps infer a little bit more, though. Piston seems to be based on the X5A Modular Computer, and is probably very closely related to the X7A Modular Computer, a failed Kickstarter project. X3i doesn’t explicitly state what CPU is under the hood of the X5A, but it seems to be a last-generation AMD CPU (the data sheet doesn’t even mention a GPU, for some reason). The X7A, if it were ever to come to fruition, seems to have an A8 or A10 Trinity APU and up to 8GB of RAM. Both systems can run Windows or Linux. The Modular Computers all seem to be 4-inch (10cm) cubes — they’re very small indeed.

As the name suggests, the X5A and X7A are modular — in theory, there is a processor board (CPU and RAM), primary I/O board (USB, SSD, eSATA), and secondary I/O board (DVI, LAN) that can be switched out. The idea being that, next year, you might want to upgrade to the latest and greatest CPU. There obviously isn’t space for a discrete graphics card, though, so you’re stuck with AMD for now — at least until Intel’s integrated GPUs are up to snuff.

If I had to guess, I would say that Valve saw the X7A on Kickstarter, thought it would make a nice Steam Box, and decided to invest. Whether this is actually the Steam Box, though, I am not so sure. If the Kickstarter had succeeded, the X7A was slated to cost $1,000. The X3A, which is meant to be bargain version of the X7A, was meant to cost $500 — but again, like the X5A, there’s no mention of the GPU inside the X3A, suggesting it’s not exactly a gaming rig.

Of course, Valve might be able to drive the costs lower, or sell the Steam Box at very close to cost, but we’re still talking about a very expensive bit of kit. It’s one of the oldest computing laws: Small, cheap, powerful — pick two. At just four inches cubed, the X7A/Steam Box would be one of the smallest x86 PCs in existence. With a chassis that small, there are severe limitations on heat dissipation, meaning you have to use the finest (and most expensive) silicon that money can buy.

In reality, I would expect the real Steam Box to be a lot larger — something like the GameCube (6-inch cube) — or perhaps it won’t even be a cube! The main thing, though, is that the the Steam Box must be cheap. The Steam Box is now confirmed to run Linux, and thus will launch with a very small library of games. There is simply no way that Valve would try to pitch a Steam Box that is in essence a very expensive paperweight.

This box is going to use up WAY TOO MUCH Power THANKS TO USING Second-RATE AMD APU’s Instead of First rate Intel CPU’s.

Jml

Why would they use Crappy AMD APU’s when AMD can’t make a CPU to save its life. Intel uses 1/2 the power and is 2x as fast where it counts.

http://www.facebook.com/andrew.s.hodge Andrew Steven Hodge

Because AMD still provides way more performance per dollar compared to intel, pushes graphics beyond what Intel will ever be capable of- even when discrete Nvidia cards are used, and idle at a fraction of the power that Intel CPUs do.

Jml

AMD’s IGP’s are faster than Intel’s for NOW but they use far more power to do so. AMD is good at idle and NOTHING MORE. At load AMD uses so much power than it should be labeled as a heater.

http://www.facebook.com/andrew.s.hodge Andrew Steven Hodge

AMD’s APUs use more power than an Intel because they are doing more work. You forget that Intel systems still require a discrete GPU, which, when you look at total system power draw, means that the AMD system actually performs better for less power.

Jml

Wrong Intel system will use less power even with the discrete GPU because AMD’s APU’s take up so much power.

http://www.facebook.com/joe.mahoney.583 Joe Mahoney

Really…were are the sources? AMD A10-5800k draws 110 watts of power under full load. that includes the processor AND the 7660d on die graphics. the I3-3220 draws 65 watts under load with it piss poor intel HD 2500 graphics. Now Lets bring the Intel up to par with the AMD A10 for gaming. Your gonna have to pair that I3 with a dedicated graphics card. lets go with the 7750 for the sake its the lowest on the 7000 series cards. So, the card itself draws 55 watts of power under load, along with the 65 watts of the I3, 55+65= 120 watts of power, If my math is correct that is more then the AMD A10 5800k. Also note, now you have 2 chips you must cool instead of 1. so when it comes to efficiency, the numbers just make the point. For a box the size of your palm, An AMD chip would be the best option for performance price and keeping the thermals in check in such a small unit. All info was found doing like 10 seconds of searching tomshardware.

Jml

Your an idiot. Your measuring TDP’s not power consumed. By the was the 7750 is much faster than the AMD A10-5800K. They use about the same power but provide twice the performance. Thermals won’t be a problem on an Intel based Machine.

http://www.facebook.com/joe.mahoney.583 Joe Mahoney

humm, no my sources were power consumption. not TDP’s. please show me were you see twice the performance? And last I checked, Intel chips have a heat threshold of 100c before frying, AMD clocks in at 66c max before permanent damage to the chip. tell me again how Intel will runs cooler when under load and thermals will not be a problem with a dedicated graphics card pumping out heat as well. You do know we are talking about the X7A right. And for immature name calling, Please see your way to your local XBOX 360 and play some call of duty if your going to go that route, instead of having a normal discussion.

http://www.facebook.com/joe.mahoney.583 Joe Mahoney

Really…were are the sources? AMD A10-5800k draws 110 watts of power under full load. that includes the processor AND the 7660d on die graphics. the I3-3220 draws 65 watts under load with it piss poor intel HD 2500 graphics. Now Lets bring the Intel up to par with the AMD A10 for gaming. Your gonna have to pair that I3 with a dedicated graphics card. lets go with the 7750 for the sake its the lowest on the 7000 series cards. So, the card itself draws 55 watts of power under load, along with the 65 watts of the I3, 55+65= 120 watts of power, If my math is correct that is more then the AMD A10 5800k. Also note, now you have 2 chips you must cool instead of 1. so when it comes to efficiency, the numbers just make the point. For a box the size of your palm, An AMD chip would be the best option for performance price and keeping the thermals in check in such a small unit. All info was found doing like 10 seconds of searching tomshardware.

Henry Young

On Linux (what the steambox will run) the AMD Bulldozer/Piledriver CPUs match and can even out perform Intel ones. AMD APUs also use less power then Intel CPUs of similar performance.

Really saying Intel is better then AMD or AMD is better then Intel just shows that you know very little about computers and how they work.

Jml

Please provide proof because there IS NO WAY that AMD uses less power than INTEL even in Linux?

Henry Young

An AMD APU provides the same performance as a Intel CPU + a discrete GPU but for less power and cheaper.

An AMD A10-5800k provides the same CPU performance as a Intel

i3-2120, the A10 is rated at 100W and the i3 is rated at 65W, but the i3 needs a discrete GPU to allow it to play games.

Jml

Your an idiot the i3 even with a discrete GPU will use less power than AMD’s 100W TDP Solution and AMD’s solution is not much better than Intel’s HD4000 when it comes to games. Wrong Intel is far faster than ANY AMD CPU/APU in existence.

http://www.facebook.com/dillinger.t Dylan Thomson

Could you please tell me of this magical Discrete GPU that uses only 35W TDP and out performs the A10 APU. Does this gpu require extreme faith to exists or does it somehow run only on Unicorn Farts?

Constantine

I don’t understand the AMD hate. NVidia and AMD (I still call them ATI) hardware have similar power consumption metrics – when a card requires a direct rail from the power supply, consumption ratings no longer matter. AMD/ATI is traditionally cheaper than NVidia when stacking up for similar performance with the exception of the latest cards where both will take your hard-earned money and laugh all the way to the bank.

These are businesses that thrive on stupid discussions about which GPU designer is better. The more FUD there is, the more money they both make. If you start being realistic about what you need: A GPU that doesn’t drop framerates below 24 fps at mostly high settings on a decently optimized game. Then you get a card that can do that from a reasonable manufacturer that can solder chips to a board correctly at a decent price. Limit yourself to those restrictions and ATI has the better per unit build cost. This is also Valve you folks are nay-saying – if anyone knows what’s up with GPUs and the games people (not gaming geeks/nerds like the lot of you) play, Valve does.

Also keep in mind that AMD and NVidia just build the chips. They then farm out plopping them on boards to a variety of manufacturers that range from crap to mediocre. There’s no such thing as a good manufacturer of GPU boards. When you get a garbage card, don’t blame AMD/NVidia, blame the quality control, or lack thereof, from the manufacturer you bought it from because the chip itself is probably just fine. If you are experiencing freezes and lockups and BSODs, then your card is more likely not getting enough power from the power supply or you stupidly OC’ed it – replace the power supply with something more powerful or stop OC’ing your hardware for needless extra fps. Unless fps no longer means what it used to, you literally can’t see anything past 24 fps – human eyes simply aren’t capable of it.

Edgarska

You had me until the last bit.
Frame rates higher than 24 do look better, the human eye is very capable of seeing the difference.

Maskeladden

I don’t understand, how are you to fit a decent graphics card in this box? The games you can play will be very limited.

hakan

human eyes simply aren’t capable notice difference higher than 24 fps is wrong.
it is wrong.
it is wrong.
it is wrong.
it is a freaking misunderstanding.
human eyes are capable to see difference up to 85 fps.
but it can see pictures higher than 24 fps as animated.
that is why 24 pictures are needed to make 1 seconds movie.
it is the lowest limit to make it animated.
lowest limit to make pictures animated
that doesnt mean human eyes cant notice higher than that.
human eyes are capable to see difference up to 85 fps.

I am stupid, please help me to understand how I can play, let’s say BF3, on 21W…

http://www.facebook.com/dillinger.t Dylan Thomson

Just for good measure. Considering Sony engineers, Microsoft Engineers and now Xi3 Engineers are all building dedicated gaming machines based on AMD APU’s.
I want to know which fan boys commenting on this article actually think they know more about engineering gaming hardware than Microsoft & Sony do? Their highly paid dev teams and system architects seem to be under the impression that AMD more flexible, better value and more future proof. How could they be so wrong, they should have hired the system engineers that happen to frequent this site.

Sure PS4 and XBOX 720 use a discrete GPU but this is a only for the first few versions of the consoles as AMD is aiming to have equally high performing GPU’s integrated into future revisions of the APU’s. Even if its 3 years down the line, that means MS and Sony will save an INSANE amount of money as some point! COST PERFORMANCE GUYS! NUFF SAID.

This is what customers want: “Hi i’d like to make a order for 100 Million Chips please. I’d like 6 x86 cpu cores, 4 ARM A15 high clocked cores and 2 low clocked cores, as well as a high performance GPU and a much small low performance one all on the one chip please!”

Intels Responce: “We don’t have that capability and even if we did FU!”

AMD’s Responce: “Done! When you you want it?”

Tyler Dinsmoor

>linux
>makes it a paperweight

The market for Linux gaming has started to take off, as OpenGL is a much better renderer that performs better under Linux in addition to Valve investing heavily in its fruition. Besides, almost any game will run just fine under Wine.

Use of this site is governed by our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Copyright 1996-2015 Ziff Davis, LLC.PCMag Digital Group All Rights Reserved. ExtremeTech is a registered trademark of Ziff Davis, LLC. Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission of Ziff Davis, LLC. is prohibited.